Duymayan v. Westland Real Estate Group

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES D ISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 2 * * * 3 Mert Duymayan, Case No. 2:25-cv-00728-ART-BNW 4 Plaintiff, 5 ORDER v. 6 Westland Real Estate Group, 7 Defendant. 8 9 Plaintiff brings this lawsuit and moves to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See ECF No. 10 1. Plaintiff submitted the affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing an inability to prepay 11 fees or costs or give security for them. Accordingly, the Court will grant his request to proceed in 12 forma pauperis. The Court now screens Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 13 I. Analysis 14 A. Screening standard 15 Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must screen the complaint 16 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims 17 and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be 18 granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 19 1915(e)(2). Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for 20 failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 21 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient 22 factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft 23 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only 24 dismiss them “if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of 25 his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 26 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678). 27 1 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of 2 material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Wyler 3 Summit P’ship v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). 4 Although the standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff 5 must provide more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 6 544, 555 (2007). A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. 7 Unless it is clear the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured through amendment, a pro se 8 plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s 9 deficiencies. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 10 B. Screening the Complaint 11 Plaintiff’s complaint contains few factual allegations. See ECF No. 1-1. He appears to be 12 complaining of living conditions at the place where he is residing. In turn, it would seem Plaintiff 13 is claiming there has been a breach of a residential contract—but he does not make mention of 14 any type of agreement or what the provisions of that agreement may be. In addition, to the extent 15 Plaintiff is attempting to state a claim on a different theory of liability, it is not clear what that 16 theory might be. In short, even liberally construing Plaintiff’s complaint, it does not state 17 sufficient factual allegations about the underlying dispute and the defendant’s role in the matter to 18 state a claim. 19 If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, the document must be titled “Amended 20 Complaint.” The amended complaint must contain a short and plain statement describing the 21 underlying case and each of the defendant’s involvement in the case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). 22 That is, he must articulate what kind of action he is bringing against the defendant and provide 23 facts in support of that claim. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible 24 pleading standard, Plaintiff still must give defendant fair notice of his claims against it and of 25 Plaintiff’s entitlement to relief. 26 Additionally, Plaintiff is advised that if he files an amended complaint, the original 27 complaint (ECF No. 1-1) no longer serves any function in this case. As such, the amended 1 || documents. The Court cannot refer to a prior pleading or other documents to make Plaintiff's 2 || amended complaint complete. 3 || IL. CONCLUSION 4 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 5 || pauperis (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must detach and separately file 7 || Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 8 IT FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, he 10 |} must do so by May 30, 2025. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation 11 || that this case be dismissed. 12 13 DATED: April 30, 2025 14 15 Kz gm lea We batn BRENDA WEKSLER □ 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28